Advertisement
Journal of Clinical Oncology  
Search for:
Limit by:
  Browse by Subject or Issue
Home Search or Browse JCO Subscriptions PDA Services My JCO Customer Service

Originally published as JCO Early Release 10.1200/JCO.2004.00.0497 on October 17 2005

Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 23, No 33 (November 20), 2005: pp. 8289-8295
© 2005 American Society of Clinical Oncology.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Save to my personal folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lanciano, R.
Right arrow Articles by O'Connor, D. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lanciano, R.
Right arrow Articles by O'Connor, D. M.
Related Articles
Right arrowRelated Editorial

Randomized Comparison of Weekly Cisplatin or Protracted Venous Infusion of Fluorouracil in Combination With Pelvic Radiation in Advanced Cervix Cancer: A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study

Rachelle Lanciano, Alison Calkins, Brian N. Bundy, Groesbeck Parham, Joseph A. Lucci, III, David H. Moore, Bradley J. Monk, Dennis M. O'Connor

From the Department of Radiation Oncology, Delaware County Memorial Hospital, Drexel Hill, PA; Radiation Oncologist, St Joseph's Hospital/Cancer Institute, Tampa, FL; Gynecologic Oncology Group Statistical and Data Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY; University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK; Department of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Texas, Galveston Medical Branch, Galveston, TX; Department of Obstetrics/Gynecology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of California-Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA; and Norton Healthcare Inc, Clinical Pathology Associates, Louisville, KY

Address reprint requests to Rachelle Lanciano, MD, Radiation Oncology, Delaware County Memorial Hospital, 501 N Lansdowne Ave, Drexel Hill, PA 19026; e-mail: rlancmd{at}aol.com

PURPOSE: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy is the standard of care for locally advanced cervix cancer; the optimal chemotherapy regimen is not yet defined. This trial was designed to compare the outcome of protracted venous infusion (PVI) fluorouracil (FU) with standard weekly cisplatin and concurrent radiation therapy (RT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIB, IIIB, and IVA cervical cancer with clinically negative aortic nodes were eligible. Pelvic RT dose was 45 Gy with a parametrial boost to involved sides of 5.4 to 9 Gy, and high- or low-dose rate intracavitary brachytherapy. Standard therapy was weekly cisplatin 40 mg/m2, and experimental therapy was PVI FU 225 mg/m2/d for 5 d/wk for six cycles during RT.

RESULTS: The study was closed prematurely when a planned interim futility analysis indicated that PVI FU/RT had a higher treatment failure rate (35% higher) and would, most likely, not result in an improvement in progression-free survival compared with weekly cisplatin/RT. The PVI FU/RT arm continues to show a higher risk of treatment failure (relative risk [RR] unadjusted, 1.29) and a higher mortality rate (RR unadjusted, 1.37). There was no difference in pelvic treatment failure between regimens, but there was an increase in the failure rate at distant sites in the PVI FU arm.

CONCLUSION: In this study, PVI FU does not show improved outcome over weekly cisplatin. Future research should explore combinations of FU with cisplatin, new radiosensitizers, and active drugs combined with RT to reduce the high rate of pelvic and distant treatment failure still seen in advanced cervix cancer.

Supported by National Cancer Institute grants to the Gynecologic Oncology Group Administrative Office (Grant No. CA 27469) and the Gynecologic Oncology Group Statistical Office (Grant No. CA 37517).

Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found at the end of this article.


Related Editorial

  • Chemoradiotherapy for Cervical Cancer: What Next?
    Patricia J. Eifel
    JCO 2005 23: 8277-8279 [Full Text]


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JCOHome page
R. Porschen, H.-T. Arkenau, S. Kubicka, R. Greil, T. Seufferlein, W. Freier, A. Kretzschmar, U. Graeven, A. Grothey, A. Hinke, et al.
In Reply
J. Clin. Oncol., November 1, 2007; 25(31): 5045 - 5046.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
B. J. Monk, K. S. Tewari, and W.-J. Koh
Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cervical Carcinoma: State of the Art and Future Directions
J. Clin. Oncol., July 10, 2007; 25(20): 2952 - 2965.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



About
JCO
 Editorial
Roster
 Advertising
Information
 Librarians &
Institutions
 Rights &
Permissions
 Site Map

Copyright © 2005 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Online ISSN: 1527-7755. Print ISSN: 0732-183X
Terms and Conditions of Use
  HighWire Press HighWire Press™ assists in the publication of JCO Online